(10-11-2010, 12:21 PM)Quantum Wrote: It begs the next question, shall I/we remain forevermore timelessly confused, always approaching the mystery of infinity, but never a chance for understanding IT?
This is a valid consideration whilst considering Infinity in to the equation (so sorry to do so, nevertheless... ) Consider if you will, Zeno's paradox.
In order that one may walk from point A to point B, that entity must first walk to the halfway point between A and B. But before reaching the halfway point, he must walk to the halfway point of the halfway point of the halfway point... ad infinitum. Similarly, for the special "infinity clock" to count the time of one second, it must first count the halfway point to that second, and the halfway of the halfway point, ad infinitum. In short, the entity walking or the clock ticking can never reach it's destination by the virtue of an infinite distance to traverse. So how can we expect to reach the point of infinity and merge with all that is? And yet, we see the entity does reach point B, and the clock does count the second. So the paradox is sort of a humorous one. It makes no sense that some things are the way they are, but they are that way regardless.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes
Quote:Zeno's paradoxes are a set of problems generally thought to have been devised by Zeno of Elea to support Parmenides's doctrine that "all is one" and that, contrary to the evidence of our senses, the belief in plurality and change is mistaken, and in particular that motion is nothing but an illusion. It is usually assumed, based on Plato's Parmenides 128c-d, that Zeno took on the project of creating these paradoxes because other philosophers had created paradoxes against Parmenides's view. Thus Zeno can be interpreted as saying that to assume there is plurality is even more absurd than assuming there is only "the One" (Parmenides 128d).
~Lavazza